The Nvidia Defect Forum

Mediation Information

Background
• Computer purchased 01/11/2007 for £899.99 from PC World Birkenhead
• In early May 2010 the computer started showing signs of failure, notably shutting down unexpectedly.
• This fault was traced to the computer’s hardware, the graphics card or GPU. Following this, it failed completely and would not even start up, rendering it useless.
• Internet search revealed this as an extremely common fault, with all graphics cards of a particular model (which included mine) being vulnerable, due to a manufacturing fault where the material used in attaching the graphics card to the motherboard being in appropriate and prone to early failure due to heat stress.
• NVIDIA themselves have admitted the fault and set aside large funds for resolution of the problem.
• The computer was sent to an expert who tested the computer and verified that the fault I was experiencing was the one aforementioned, and a result of a manufacturing defect.

• Initial contact with PC World was through their store, whereby they directed me to a non-existent email address for customer services.
• After using several methods of contact, I began contact with one of their representatives. They advised me regarding obtaining an engineer’s report etc during the initial contact.
• Once this had been obtained, they admitted responsibility for taking care of the fault and made an offer based on depreciation of £450 plus the cost of the expert’s report.
• They based this on a linear depreciation of the laptop over an expected lifespan of 5 years.
• This offer did not include anything regarding damages, time or trouble etc.
• I refused this offer as I did not feel that depreciation of a laptop is a linear exercise, nor do I agree that depreciation should be taken into account as to me, the worth of the laptop is intrinsic and is worth £900 to me until the day it goes into the bin.
• In addition, their offer would not be sufficient to even replace the laptop with one of similar specification.

• I proceeded with a small claims settlement on this basis.
• Initial communications indicated they would effectively increase their offer by £5.

• Their case is based on acceptance and rejection of goods under section 35 of the sale of goods act and maintain that since I had kept the laptop for more than a few days, I had been deemed to have accepted it.
• My case is that this is not relevant since I am not claiming under rejection of the laptop but under breach of contract for supply of goods which had an inherent fault.
• My case is based on the fact that the goods were faulty when supplied and this gives me recourse to a full refund or replacement. The expected life of the laptop is in the region of 5-7 years and this is a very premature failure.
• Despite my indication by telephone that I would accept a modest increase in an offer to something in the region of £650 in total (including small claims issue fees etc), they refused to modify their offer. As a result, I proceeded with small claims proceedings.

• Further to continuing proceedings, I stated that I was willing to accept a settlement of £890.
• Although I do not believe that their idea of depreciation costs is at all correct or necessary, I am happy to compromise and this figure represented a moderate depreciation of £200, plus refund of some of my costs.
• They did not reply to this offer of settlement.

• In addition to the claim for a full refund of the laptop cost, I have included damages, as allowed by the sale of goods act. This has included time, car depreciation costs and other sundries, bringing my claim through the small claims court to £1289.99. Further to our correspondence, I have agreed to remove one part of my claim (£55) and agreed to reduce the amount claimed for car mileage.
• I feel this reflects an open attitude on my part to negotiate and modify my claim.

• For my part, I have repeatedly made reasonable offers of settlement along the way to avoid proceeding to court and minimise the cost to both sides. They have refused to consider increasing their offer and in some cases have not even responded and continue to state that I have ‘accepted the laptop’ and thus have no right to a refund, despite the fact that it was faulty at the time of purchase and condemned to an early failure. For their part, they have offered a sum which would not even cover the cost of replacing the faulty goods, never mind my time and effort in solving this problem. Their decision to increase their offer by £5 is little short of insulting.
• As a result, if I proceed to court I will still be claiming the full amount.

• While county courts do not take precedents from other county courts, several cases of an identical nature to mine have been settled in full in the claimant’s favour.

wish me luck and hope that the mediator decides in my favour!